WorldFamilies has changed our Forum Operating system and migrated the postings from the prior system. We hope that you’ll find this new system easier to use and we expect it to manage spammers much better. If you can’t find an old posting, please check our Legacy Forum to see if you can see the old posting there.

There is a new R-L21* to add to the map in northeastern France: Doucet, YSearch KZYXF. His most distant y-dna ancestor came from Sedan in the Ardennes, near the Belgian border and not too far from our man in Luxembourg, Conrardy.

I've uploaded!

Caesar also mentions the Armorican confederation which include the following people, located between the Loire and the Seine and that seems to be rich in L21: Coriosolites the Redones the Ambibares the Caletes the Osismii the Lemovices (or Lexovi?), The Veneti, the Unelli. These different tribes, Do they have a common origin?

Could be. Thanks for pointing out the fact that there were many Celtic tribes in Armorica long before Britons starting going there from Britannia in the 4th and 5th centuries.

For what its worth (maybe not much) some of the old head measuring/eye colour noting type physical anthropologists concluded that the British genetic imput in Brittany was limited and largely confined to pockets around the coast. It is not uncommon for there to be language and identity change imposed by an incoming minority. One example is Hungary. I think the national identityy and language is derived from the Magyars settlers but likely Magyar genes are (I understand - I am no expert) very much in the minority.

For what its worth (maybe not much) some of the old head measuring/eye colour noting type physical anthropologists concluded that the British genetic imput in Brittany was limited and largely confined to pockets around the coast. It is not uncommon for there to be language and identity change imposed by an incoming minority. One example is Hungary. I think the national identityy and language is derived from the Magyars settlers but likely Magyar genes are (I understand - I am no expert) very much in the minority.

I think those kinds of anthropometric things have value, as long as they aren't taken too far. As you know, there was contact between Armorica and Britain long long before the Romans came and long before the movement of Britons to Armorica at the close of the Roman period.

If Bretagne is an L21 hotspot - and I think it probably is - it doesn't seem likely that all of it can be attributed to the British exodus.

I would like to point that, while Caesar put the limits of Aquitania at the Garonne, the roman province of Aquitania and the merovingian kingdom by the same name had their borders extended up to the Loire. There is a transition area between the Garonne and the Loire between Celtic Gallia and Aquitanian.

I would like to point that, while Caesar put the limits of Aquitania at the Garonne, the roman province of Aquitania and the merovingian kingdom by the same name had their borders extended up to the Loire. There is a transition area between the Garonne and the Loire between Celtic Gallia and Aquitanian.

I'm sure the same is probably true of the zone approaching the frontier between Caesar's Gallia Celtica and Gallia Belgica, too.

But he did put the Aquitanians south of the Garonne and the Gauls north of it, even though today's French region of Aquitaine also extends north of the Garonne.

.... Thanks for pointing out the fact that there were many Celtic tribes in Armorica long before Britons starting going there from Britannia in the 4th and 5th centuries.

The 2009 paper, "The genetic position of Western Brittany (Finistère, France) in the Celtic Y chromosome landscape" reports

Quote from: KRouault

The molecular analysis revealed that 82.2% of the Y chromosomes fell into haplogroup R1b, placing Finistère within the Western European landscape

I've looked but I've never actually seen this full paper. If they have set of haplotypes available, I could compare with our R-L21* data. At the least, if Robert Hughes is right, and 17-14-10 (Wales Modal 1) people are ancient Britons, you'd think there should be something like them in Brittany.

If there any other area with such a mix of all the S116 clades as France and SW Germany? It seems to me somehow that that is the core for diversity of forms compared to places like Ireland (L21) and Iberia (S116*) which you could argue show very much reduced levels of diversity of R1b1b2 forms. It perhaps could be argued they have only recieved a fraction of the R1b1b2 'experience' suggesting that both had (opposite) peripheral geographic positions relative to the S116 core. As far as I can see, places like France, England and SW Germany have a more highly diverse mix of S116 and R1b1b2 forms in general, suggesting that they were nearer or part of the S116 and wider R1b1b2 core. That is not very precise or mind blowing but to me points towards the France-SW Germany area as a possibly site of the take off of R1b1b2 or certainly S116. That all of course remains a shot in the dark with the database for Europe east of Germany so poor.

I would like to point that, while Caesar put the limits of Aquitania at the Garonne, the roman province of Aquitania and the merovingian kingdom by the same name had their borders extended up to the Loire. There is a transition area between the Garonne and the Loire between Celtic Gallia and Aquitanian.

I'm sure the same is probably true of the zone approaching the frontier between Caesar's Gallia Celtica and Gallia Belgica, too.

But he did put the Aquitanians south of the Garonne and the Gauls north of it, even though today's French region of Aquitaine also extends north of the Garonne.

I think the Aquitaine region in the historical sense, is an area between the Garonne and the Pyrenees. The current "regions" of France have been created during the twentieth century, with the main concern to establish areas of relatively similar size. The historic boundaries were rarely observed (as Britanny for example).

It happened the same thing when the Romans, after conquering Gaul, divisaire Gaul of three regions of similar size. Aquitaine stretches so far as the Loire, but has no historical truth.

I think the Aquitaine region in the historical sense, is an area between the Garonne and the Pyrenees. The current "regions" of France have been created during the twentieth century, with the main concern to establish areas of relatively similar size. The historic boundaries were rarely observed (as Britanny for example).

It happened the same thing when the Romans, after conquering Gaul, divisaire Gaul of three regions of similar size. Aquitaine stretches so far as the Loire, but has no historical truth.

I would like to point that, while Caesar put the limits of Aquitania at the Garonne, the roman province of Aquitania and the merovingian kingdom by the same name had their borders extended up to the Loire. There is a transition area between the Garonne and the Loire between Celtic Gallia and Aquitanian.

I'm sure the same is probably true of the zone approaching the frontier between Caesar's Gallia Celtica and Gallia Belgica, too.

But he did put the Aquitanians south of the Garonne and the Gauls north of it, even though today's French region of Aquitaine also extends north of the Garonne.

I think the Aquitaine region in the historical sense, is an area between the Garonne and the Pyrenees. The current "regions" of France have been created during the twentieth century, with the main concern to establish areas of relatively similar size. The historic boundaries were rarely observed (as Britanny for example).

It happened the same thing when the Romans, after conquering Gaul, divisaire Gaul of three regions of similar size. Aquitaine stretches so far as the Loire, but has no historical truth.

I agree that the core territory of ancient Aquitanian people should be limited by the Garonne, however it is worth to note that in late Merovingian times that region was indeed the duchy of Vasconia, while the region between the Garonne and the Loire become the duchy of Aquitaine, so a degree of Aquitanian real influence can´t be discarded. Remember that the word Guyenne comes from Guiana, a corruption for Aquitania.

I would like to point that, while Caesar put the limits of Aquitania at the Garonne, the roman province of Aquitania and the merovingian kingdom by the same name had their borders extended up to the Loire. There is a transition area between the Garonne and the Loire between Celtic Gallia and Aquitanian.

I'm sure the same is probably true of the zone approaching the frontier between Caesar's Gallia Celtica and Gallia Belgica, too.

But he did put the Aquitanians south of the Garonne and the Gauls north of it, even though today's French region of Aquitaine also extends north of the Garonne.

I think the Aquitaine region in the historical sense, is an area between the Garonne and the Pyrenees. The current "regions" of France have been created during the twentieth century, with the main concern to establish areas of relatively similar size. The historic boundaries were rarely observed (as Britanny for example).

It happened the same thing when the Romans, after conquering Gaul, divisaire Gaul of three regions of similar size. Aquitaine stretches so far as the Loire, but has no historical truth.

Interesting to note that the traditional capital of the older duchy of Aquitania was Toulouse, an independent county in this period. Borders were very fluid in ancient times, before the advent of modern states.

The current "regions" of France have been created during the twentieth century, with the main concern to establish areas of relatively similar size. The historic boundaries were rarely observed (as Britanny for example).

Jérôme,

It is very difficult to speak about historic boundaries, because you have to specify "when". In fact historic boundaries change very much during history. As said IALEM: "Borders were very fluid in ancient times".

For example, if you take Brittany, the southern part: "Comté de Nantes" and "Pays de Retz" belong to Brittany only since year 851 after Viking raids on the Loire river. Before 851, Pays de Retz belonged to "Comté du Poitou", and "Comté de Nantes" belonged to "Marches de Bretagne" outside Brittany.

As you told in a previous post, Brittany was occupied before Roman times by the Redones the Ambibares the Caletes the Osismii the Lemovices (or Lexovi?), The Veneti, the Unelli. But I don't think these people were from different origin than other Celtic people of Gaul like Andecaves or Parisii. And I think all these peoples spoke a similar language: the Gaulish which were very different from the modern "Breton" language.

Relative to L21, I think there is no specificty of Brittany in France. I think L21 came in western France during Bell Beaker times (2.500 or 2.000 BC) from Rhine valley, in the same time than L21 came in Brittish Isles from the same Rhine valley.

It is very difficult to speak about historic boundaries, because you have to specify "when". In fact historic boundaries change very much during history. As said IALEM: "Borders were very fluid in ancient times".

For example, if you take Brittany, the southern part: "Comté de Nantes" and "Pays de Retz" belong to Brittany only since year 851 after Viking raids on the Loire river. Before 851, Pays de Retz belonged to "Comté du Poitou", and "Comté de Nantes" belonged to "Marches de Bretagne" outside Brittany.

I agree! But I just wanted to point out that the presents regions are often inventions of the twentieth century, such as "the Pays de la Loire" or "le Centre".And that Aquitaine today is not the Aquitaine historic

As you told in a previous post, Brittany was occupied before Roman times by the Redones the Ambibares the Caletes the Osismii the Lemovices (or Lexovi?), The Veneti, the Unelli. But I don't think these people were from different origin than other Celtic people of Gaul like Andecaves or Parisii. And I think all these peoples spoke a similar language: the Gaulish which were very different from the modern "Breton" language.

Relative to L21, I think there is no specificty of Brittany in France. I think L21 came in western France during Bell Beaker times (2.500 or 2.000 BC) from Rhine valley, in the same time than L21 came in Brittish Isles from the same Rhine valley.

Bernard

Well The Ambibare, the Caletes, the Unelli are in the Normandy..The Armoric is mentioned in ancient texts. Caesar said that these people were called themselves the Armorican and enumerate them.

They traded with the British Islands and had, before the roman invasion, almost the monopoly of this trade with the islands. We found for example coins Coriosolites in southern England

And I did not rule out the hypothesis that island Britaniques population have migrated into north-west of France a few centuries before Christ. This is perhaps not my first assumption but I think it is possible.

And I did not rule out the hypothesis that island Britaniques population have migrated into north-west of France a few centuries before Christ. This is perhaps not my first assumption but I think it is possible.